Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematica Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of Mathematica. It's 100% free, no registration required.

How can I analyse data stored in Mathematica using Wolfram | Alpha? Here is an example:

I have a list: a = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}

I can plot it in Mathematica, like this:

enter image description here

But once I try to use Wolfram | Alpha, an error message appears:

enter image description here

How can I perform different types of analyses on Mathematica data using Wolfram | Alpha?

share|improve this question
    
Try = List plot of {1,2,3,4,5} –  RunnyKine Mar 1 '13 at 4:03
    
I edited your question quite heavily to make it more clear, and to correct the grammar. Please verify that it is still asking what you wanted to ask. –  Szabolcs Mar 1 '13 at 4:25

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

For your specific example, the following does what you want:

= List plot of {1,2,3,4,5}

But in general don't send WolframAlpha inputs as though you're using Mathematica. Just send free-form linguistic input i.e. plain English (or other languages it understands). For example, to plot the Sine function don't type Plot[Sin[x],{x,-3,3}]

just type "plot sin of x from -3 to 3"

Interestingly, if you send the following = a + 2 to WolframAlpha, it returns the correct result, adding 2 to each element of a. But using a in place of the list in the free-form input seems to confuse WolframAlpha.

share|improve this answer
2  
I think the gist of the question is: how can we transfer data present in Mathematica to Wolfram|Alpha? That is, use the variable a directly. (I don't think it's directly possible, at least not without W|A Pro (??)) –  Szabolcs Mar 1 '13 at 4:23
    
@Szabolcs see my edit above. It works partially. –  RunnyKine Mar 1 '13 at 4:25
    
Interesting observation, and +1 for that! –  Szabolcs Mar 1 '13 at 4:25
    
It seems W|A is very quirky: if you give the list a longer name, it'll recognize it: mylist = {1, 2, 4, 8, 20}, = plot mylist. But the plot won't exactly be what you'd expect ... –  Szabolcs Mar 1 '13 at 4:43
2  
@Szabolcs I'm not sure that W|A has syntax at all - let alone "reliable syntax". :) –  Mark McClure Mar 1 '13 at 4:54

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.